No abstract

Based on current evidence, meniscal allograft transplantation appears to be an effective intervention for patients with a symptomatic meniscal deficient knee. This should ideally be confirmed with a randomised controlled trial. There is not currently enough evidence to determine whether it is chondroprotective.

Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is one of the most successful orthopaedic procedures that alleviates pain and restores function in patients with degenerative knee joint diseases. Arthrofibrosis, abnormal scarring in which dense fibrous tissue prevents normal range of motion, develops in ~3–10% of TKA patients. No prophylactic intervention is available and treatment is restricted to aggressive physiotherapy or revision surgery. Tissue was collected from patients undergoing primary (n = 30) or revision (n = 27) TKA. Revision patients were stratified as non-arthrofibrotic and arthrofibrotic. Tissue was macroscopically and histologically compared to improve our understanding of the pathophysiology of arthrofibrosis. Macroscopically, tissue from primary TKA presents as homogenous, fatty tissue whereas tissue from revision TKA presents as dense, pigmented tissue. Histologically, there was dramatic tissue remodelling, increased collagen deposition and increased (myo)fibroblast staining in tissue from revision TKA. Significantly, tissue architecture was similar between revision patients regardless of clinically diagnosis. There are significant differences in architecture and composition of tissue from revision TKA over primary TKA. Surprisingly, whether revision TKA were clinically diagnosed as arthrofibrotic or non-arthrofibrotic there were still significant differences in fibrotic markers compared to primary TKA suggesting an ongoing fibrotic process in all revision knees.

Introduction and objectivesSurgical site infections (SSIs) represent a common and serious complication of all surgical interventions. Microorganisms are able to colonise sutures that are implanted in the skin, which is a causative factor of SSIs. Triclosan-coated sutures are antibacterial sutures aimed at reducing SSIs. Our objective is to update the existing literature by systematically reviewing available evidence to assess the effectiveness of triclosan-coated sutures in the prevention of SSIs.MethodsA systematic review of EMBASE, MEDLINE, AMED (Allied and complementary medicine database) and CENTRAL was performed to identify full text randomised controlled trials (RCTs) on 31 May 2019.InterventionTriclosan-coated sutures versus non-triclosan-coated sutures.Primary outcomeOur primary outcome was the development of SSIs at 30 days postoperatively. A meta-analysis was performed using a fixed-effects model.ResultsTwenty-five RCTs were included involving 11 957 participants. Triclosan-coated sutures were used in 6008 participants and non triclosan-coated sutures were used in 5949. Triclosan-coated sutures significantly reduced the risk of SSIs at 30 days (relative risk 0.73, 95% CI 0.65 to 0.82). Further sensitivity analysis demonstrated that triclosan-coated sutures significantly reduced the risk of SSIs in both clean and contaminated surgery.ConclusionTriclosan-coated sutures have been shown to significantly reduced the risk of SSIs when compared with standard sutures. This is in agreement with previous work in this area. This study represented the largest review to date in this area. This moderate quality evidence recommends the use of triclosan-coated sutures in order to reduce the risk of SSIs particularly in clean and contaminated surgical procedures.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42014014856